Anyone else notice stark contrast in treatment of Acorn and Goldman Sachs?

Dems in congress abandoned Acorn lickity split when there was just an appearance of wrong doing, condemned them and cut their funding, driving the group out of business even though they responded to the conservative sting appropriately.

By contrast, Goldman Sachs lied to one class of investors to enrich another, and now we find that they bragged about profiting from shorting the real estate market, effectively betting on America to fail. If someone bothered to dig a little deeper, they could probably find some efforts to actually force the collapse and make their bets a sure thing.

And Obama still has these guys running his economics policy.

Isn't that like having al Qaeda in charge of Homeland Security, the Cayman Islands in charge of the IRS, and a drug cartel in charge of the DEA?

To get on track with financial reform, Obama not only needs to publicly fire his Goldman Sachs appointees, their enabler Geithner,and the Clinton retreads who led the charge on deregulation that made it all possible-- he needs to publicly apologize for hiring them and honestly explain the pressures that led to their appointment.

Far from a sign of weakness, that would have the same effect on public confidence President Kennedy's Bay of Pigs apology had--it showed the public he had our best interests and survival ahead of the gangsters, gamblers, sweatshop and casino owners. This move by Obama would show he is not the property of the syphilitically debauched trust fund babies on Wall Street, who would rather short the whole world economy than learn to produce any actual product or service of value to anyone other than their own degenerate class.

In short, I'd like to hear the economic equivalent of Obama's race speech not more about how helping Wall Street will trickle down on the rest of us like the sewage from the wealthy's shining gated community on a hill that we will never be allowed to enter.

Maybe they whispered sweet nothings into Bush's & Greenspan's ears.

Oh yeah, and Clinton's too for a little necessary deregulation.

A perfect storm for the perfect fraud, all helped along, oh, innocently enough, by the bumbling government

How deep the plutocracy runs in the government. Because I know that stuff isn't going to happen.

...don't live by the same rules. Not even close. Both parties support Goldman, Morgan, etc, etc, too. It is one big incestuous relationship between big finance firms and government.

Not just Goldman, but pretty much the whole super monied elite. The CEO's making 300 times what the average worker makes, the hedge fund types making billions betting against the country, etc, etc.

It is really revolting.

Next time we observe industry leaders heading up regulatory agencies (broadcasters at the FCC, banksters at the SEC), we can say that is like having the Cayman Islands in charge of the IRS. Not sure the industries would like be compared with al-Qaeda or drug-cartels, though some have done much more damage than either, but I'm sure they couldn't object to be likened to a tax haven.

that got you there" ( in the words of Bill Hicks) would probably frown on this. The question is ,to me, is Obama a willing participant in all this, or is it a case of, again, as Hicks put it; after the new president is shown a film of JFK's killing from the grassy knoll: "Any questions? Yes...What's my agenda".

ACORN, Blackwater, Goldman Sachs - maybe suspend new monies if there are accusations, but certainly permanently remove them if the accusations are proven. And RESTORE them if the corporation is cleared as ACORN has been, over and over and over.

At some point, you have to wonder whether these appointees are working for Obama or he is working for them.

None of his top economic advisers ever worked for Goldman. Most of them came from academia.

You're citing all lower level guys.

By the way, Gensler is the biggest pain in the ass for the financial industry today.

they have the economy as a hostage. If they don;t cooperate the economy tanks.

And I suspect if we broke them or let them fail, there would be brief economic chaos followed by a less cyclical economy.